By ICN Editorial Board ​

Summer break was nice while it lasted, but now that we’re into the month of September it’s time to get back to the grind. No, we don’t mean the start of school! Believe it or not, election season is here again. The primary election was June 5, but because the Measure B debate over the future of the veterans cemetery was so contentious, to many of us it seems like election season has barely ended. 

It was nice, though, for social media sites like Facebook and Nextdoor to be able to focus on noise complaints, HOA issues, and lost pets, if only for a few weeks. 

But with the slate of candidates for Irvine mayor and the city council set, and the first election signs already up around city hall, there is no doubt that November 6 will be here before we know it. 

What strikes us as tedious is that the election could shape up to be a repeat of the June Measure B battle. The same arguments are being raised, with individuals with little experience in leadership or service to the city running for office on a single issue.  

Why? Because Measure B proved to be a successful wedge issue in the city, which is just what certain interests in Irvine had hoped for. 

Well, at least for this month, we choose not to engage.  

Instead, we are going to suggest that we all practice being more civil to each other, whether we are meeting in person or online, and when we gather to speak and debate the important issues of the day.  
What is civility, exactly? Well, we know what it isn’t: group chanting of “lock her/him up” or “recall, recall” at public meetings and events.  

Perhaps we all need a refresher course on decorum. We searched online and asked friends for some of their tips. One we liked was to speak to others with the same tone that one would use at the dinner table in front of young children. No, not when we discipline them. But while explaining something, or answering one of their questions.  
​
Here are some simple ideas to encourage civility for your consideration:  
 
• Treat everyone courteously  
• Pay attention 
• Listen to others respectfully  
• Acknowledge others 
• Think the best 
• Listen 
• Be inclusive 
• Speak kindly 
• Give open-minded consideration to all viewpoints  
• Don’t speak ill 
• Accept and give praise 
• Respect others’ opinions 
• Respect other people’s time 
• Exercise self-control  
• Focus on the issues and avoid personalizing debate  
• Assert yourself 
• Refrain from idle complaints 
• Give constructive criticism 
• Don’t shift responsibility and blame 
 
Simple, and to the point—simplistic, even. We probably break several each day, but we’ll try and do better, if everyone else will, too. At least until our next issue!  
In the meantime, you can begin to prepare for the election by reading the mayoral candidates’ own ballot statements and their Ballotpedia.com biographies in this issue. Next month, we’ll dig into the debates of the day and offer the first of our endorsements.  ​

By ICN Editorial Board ​

When it’s as hot as it’s been this summer, and the hills on the edge of our lovely city are baked brown by the sun, it’s hard not think about wildfires. That’s especially true when the past year has been one of the most destructive ever when it comes to fires in California.  

The Tubbs Fire last year in Sonoma County killed 22 and destroyed more than 5,000 structures, making it the most-destructive wildfire in California history. The Thomas Fire, also last year, burned nearly 282,000 acres across Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, making it California’s largest wildfire ever, and was followed by deadly mudslides in Montecito a month later.  

This summer the Ferguson Fire near Yosemite National Park has already burned more than 33,000 acres. At press time, more than 3,000 firefighters from as far away as Virginia are fighting the blaze, including one who died. 

While Irvine hasn’t been impacted directly, we have had Orange County fires come close enough to cause alarm.  

Last year’s Canyon 2 Fire in mountains north of Irvine burned 9,200 acres and destroyed a dozen homes east of Orange. Beckman High School in Irvine was closed, and many Irvine residents watched the fire’s progress into Peters Canyon Regional Park and toward the 241 Toll Road with deep concern. The Aliso Viejo fire burned 175 acres in Wood Canyon this past June, with the smell of smoke putting Irvine residents on high alert.  

Those pale in comparison to the worst fire in the memory of those who lived in the area 25 years ago: the Laguna Beach Fire in 1993, which advanced relentlessly across 16,000 acres in and around what is now Laguna Wilderness/Irvine Conservancy land before it destroyed or damaged 400 homes causing $528 million in damages. No Irvine homes were damaged or destroyed in that fire, but back in 1993 Turtle Ridge, Quail Hill and Shady Canyon did not exist. The fire burned in or near land where those neighborhoods now are. 
A sobering aspect of the Sonoma County fire was how deeply it reached into subdivisions and neighborhoods that were not bordering on canyons, hills and wilderness, where we often think of fire most affecting homeowners. High winds drove hot embers for miles, with fires erupting as embers got under eaves and beneath roofs or by igniting fences and shrubs beside houses, before spreading to the structures. 

The takeaway from the past few fire seasons is we all need to be prepared, whether we live next to open space or near the heart of the city. The more informed we all are the more likely we’ll be able to keep our families, neighbors and ourselves safe.  

Luckily, Irvine is the safest city in the U.S., not only for low violent crime rates, but also for excellent public safety programs. OCFA opened a new fire station at the Great Park recently. See “News and Notes” for details. The city’s disaster preparedness plans include wildfires, and the city’s website has an abundance of information about all forms of disaster preparedness.  

In addition to our public safety professionals, there are volunteers on fire watch in vulnerable areas around the city, especially during hot weather and Santa Ana winds. 

Called Orange County Fire Watch, the goal of the program is to reduce wildland fire ignition sources. Fire Watch program volunteers are stationed at high-risk areas of Orange County. They watch for fires, assist with early detection and reporting of ignitions, and report suspicious or dangerous behaviors or activities—people, either through accident, negligence or malice, start some 84 percent of wildfires. The visibility of Fire Watch volunteers is designed to be a deterrent to behavior that, intentionally or unintentionally, could result in wildfire ignitions.  

The OC Fire Watch program is sponsored and supported by the Irvine Ranch Conservancy, OC Parks, Irvine, Newport Beach, and the Orange County Fire Authority. 

One last note: many of us in Irvine have a secret weapon when it comes to fire protection—stucco. Experts recommend the building material as a preventative to the ignition and spread of wildfire. So take that, beige bashers. And let’s all stay safe this season.  
 
Wildfire preparation resources: 
ocfa.org/RSG 
firewise.org 
readyforwildfire.org 
Volunteer for OC Fire Watch: letsgooutside.org/activities/fire-watch 
Download a copy of Irvine’s emergency management plan here:
​cityofirvine.org/office-emergency-management ​

ICN Editorial Board ​

Real leadership is about making real choices.

We see a flashy new car drive by and we want it sitting in our driveway. We visit a beautiful vacation spot and we want to move there permanently. We see a masterpiece of art and we want to own it. These are normal feelings, an impulse that the average Irvine resident has to balance every day. 

If we buy those things and don’t save for our retirement, then we will be left in our later years struggling because we failed to prepare. 

This is what the Irvine City Council is dealing with on the veterans cemetery. It is exactly what the council will face on July 10, when longtime Councilmember Jeffrey Lalloway is expected to introduce a motion to move the proposed Southern California Veterans Memorial Park back to the ARDA site, just north of the Great Park and directly across the street from residences and schools.  

Lalloway, who styles himself a fiscal conservative and who knows the reality of the city’s financial situation at the Great Park is making the ultimate move on his peers. 

The Great Park, long mired in financial controversies, is finally being delivered to the people of Irvine because of a deal that Lalloway was key to approving. In fact, Lalloway was elected to the council on a mandate to end the runaway Great Park spending with no real plan that voters ultimately ousted former Mayor Larry Agran for. 

It is utterly shocking and disappointing that now, almost 8 years later, Lalloway working with Agran, his former nemesis who recently led the divisive “No on Measure B” campaign, has become the advocate of the very thing he stood against. 

If the Council on July 10 approves Lalloway’s motion to spend $40 million dollars to clean up the ARDA site, it won’t be for a cemetery. Equally troubling—and irresponsible—the action will deplete the Great Park budget for at least a decade. State officials estimate the price tag to build just the first phase of the long anticipated and sorely needed cemetery at the ARDA site is approximately $77 million. The city’s $40 million would only pay for the removal of dozens of decaying military buildings and infrastructure on the former MCAS base and not a single burial plot. State and federal officials would have to make up the difference to actually build the cemetery, and so far only the state has pledged $5 million. 

Contrast this fiscal folly with the state-preferred Strawberry Field site where the cost to prep the land and construct the first phase of the cemetery is about $29 million, or nearly $50 million less than Lalloway’s ARDA option.  

It sounds noble when Lalloway, Agran and their followers hold up the service of our veterans. But when you understand that the veterans still can’t get what they were promised without taking away the gardens, the museums, the music, the culture and the future of the Great Park, it puts Lalloway’s political power move in perspective.  

Irvine residents should force Lalloway and the council to be responsible and then vilify them for doing so. 
We don’t know what the council will do, but it shouldn’t have come to this. The veterans should be celebrating the win and a new cemetery on the Strawberry Field site if Measure B had won passage on June 5. And, the city council should be moving on to finish the build out of the Great Park. 
​
Come July 10 we will know which council members choose fiscal restraint over the feel-good politics of the day and the ones who are the real leaders making the tough choices to keep Irvine a special place to live.  ​

ICN Editorial Board ​

Those who are new to Irvine might wonder why anyone opposes building a veterans cemetery at the city- and state-approved site known as the Strawberry Fields.  

Building that cemetery on the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro fulfills a long-made promise to veterans. There’s a clear consensus among veterans (and those in local and state government who have their best interests at heart) that the Strawberry Fields is the best location for a cemetery in the city.  

It’s also the fiscally responsible site. Building the cemetery at the Strawberry Fields will save city and state taxpayers $40 million to $77 million over the previous site. That’s because the old site faces significant demolition, remediation and potential litigation hurdles before its “shovel ready.” An Orange County judge confirmed as much when ruling that phrase—shovel ready—was false and misleading, and ordered it removed from ballot arguments.  

So why is there a well-funded opposition (those “No on B” signs all over town don’t come cheap) to the veterans cemetery? 

The answer is simple: Power. 

Larry Agran wants it back.  

The veterans cemetery is simply a wedge issue, one of several the former Irvine mayor and councilmember wields in an attempt to regain favor with voters who turned him out of office in 2014.  

Opposing the wishes of the veterans serves Agran’s political purposes as he attempts to return to power and resurrect his reputation.  

Not convinced? Here’s what Agran revealed in a story posted online at kcet.org last November 29, 2017: “When we take over Irvine’s City Council in 2018-2020, we can resurrect the original [Great Park] plans and…. we’ll build Ken Smith’s canyon.” 

The story, though a pro-Agran puff piece, was revealing. It seems Agran has never gotten over losing his city council majority in the 2012 election, and being cast out of power in 2014 entirely, when he came in a distant fourth in his last city council election. 

Or was it? Sure sounds like he’s priming the political pump for another run, featuring either himself as a candidate, or by a proxy, his usual modus operandi. 

For those who didn’t live here during the end of Agran’s last reign, let’s review it, using the words of OC Weekly watchdog investigative journalist R. Scott Moxley, written in 2015: 

“Larry Agran served as the leader of a political machine that for a dozen years dictatorially controlled Irvine and the Orange County Great Park project. 

“The ugly reality includes Agran’s penchant for secrecy, cronyism, narcissism and mismanagement, especially at the Great Park, a noble idea the career politician slyly converted into a biennial election tool to keep his council alliance in power. 

“Those of us who for 12 years closely watched Agran and his political machine operate dictatorial control over the project didn’t fall for the empty hype. Their operatives received lucrative, no-bid contracts for a public park that didn’t yet exist. They wasted nearly $50 million on a park design plan that was laughably unattainable–a huge, man-made canyon and waterfalls!–the moment it landed on paper.  

“He and allies Beth Krom and Sukhee Kang spent $200 million in taxpayer funds at the Great Park without building one major facet of the project they’d originally proposed.” 

When one views the opposition to the veterans cemetery with an eye on Agran’s history, particularly when it relates to his failed vision for the Orange County Great Park, the “No on B” campaign comes into focus. 

Most veterans give Agran credit for supporting early efforts to establish a veterans cemetery. But Agran would rather kill the veterans dream of a final resting place on MCAS El Toro than have it moved from “his” original site. 
Irvine observer Greg Diamond confirms that view in a blog post: “Unless you care most about what was in the original plan—as one gets the sense that Agran still does above all—your real concern should be ‘what is the most fitting tribute to the memory of MCAS El Toro and those who served there?’” 

Diamond joins the consensus that knows the Strawberry Fields is the most fitting site. “Move it, build it, and celebrate the great accomplishment,” he says. “We are finally doing something for which future generations will remember us.” 
​
Vote “yes” on B. It’s what’s best for the veterans, for the city, and for the future.  ​

 ICN Editorial Board ​

Democracy is an interesting thing: we tend to take it for granted until some individual, group or organization is trying to subvert it.  

Veterans, citizens and public officials in Irvine and throughout Orange County and at the state level in Sacramento have long been committed to building a much-needed and infinitely deserved veterans cemetery within the boundaries of the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro.  

There have been years of studies, debates, and exchanges in the marketplace of ideas. The community and its elected representatives have held numerous public hearings where hundreds made their feelings known, including veterans from every war since and including World War II. Having heard those voices and analyzed all the information, our democratically elected representatives voted.  

The result was clear as the community came to a consensus: the best location for the veterans cemetery is at the undeveloped site near the 405 and 5 Freeways known as the Strawberry Fields.  

That site is now the approved location of the Southern California Veterans Cemetery, and has the support of the majority of our military veterans.  

“This is the America that I love. This is the America that we are. And we are great when we are together… as you can see in this bipartisan movement,” said Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva (D-Fullerton) of the effort to establish the veterans cemetery at the strawberry fields site. Quirk-Silva spearheaded approval and funding of the veterans cemetery site. 

So why, then, is there a veterans cemetery vote on June 5? 

It’s a result of a false and misleading petition drive designed to overturn the dreams of veterans for a final resting place on the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro. It was just such fraudulent petition-gathering campaigns that triggered a warning from law enforcement officials. The Orange County District Attorney strongly urged residents to “thoroughly understand” what they are signing before lending their signature to any petition effort” and cautioned that petitions often mislead the public and hide important details.  

Make no mistake: the paid petition gatherers out in Irvine last fall used emotionally charged, false and misleading arguments about “Saving the Veterans Cemetery in the Great Park” to get Measure B on the ballot, and opponents to this measure continue to use false and misleading language in trying to trick a majority of voters into voting “no” on it.  

The court’s ruling that “No on B” arguments are false and misleading further proves the group isn’t about debate, but about deceit.  

“Be warned that the cemetery opponents will spare no trick or political charade in their efforts to deny veterans a place to rest,” says Nick Berardino, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and president of the Veterans Alliance of Orange County (VALOR), a non-profit led by some of Orange County’s most distinguished veterans. 
“In addition to widespread support from veterans, Measure B has broad community backing from leaders in both the local Democratic and Republican parties,” Bernardino says. “Measure B brings a veteran’s cemetery to Irvine, away from homes, without costing Irvine taxpayers a dime and without adding any new traffic or development that hasn’t already been planned.” 

On June 5, 2018, the voters of the city of Irvine will have the final say. Will we be deceived by the false and misleading politics of a bygone era in Irvine?   

Instead, the city and its residents should move forward by voting “YES” on Measure B. Let’s keep our promises to the veterans and build the Veterans Cemetery at the city-selected and state-approved “Strawberry Field” site on the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro.  
​
Vote “YES” on Measure B. ​

ICN Editorial Board ​

Irvine residents and city officials came together, perhaps like never before, to oppose a proposal by the County of Orange to move hundreds of homeless humans to a tent city adjacent to the Great Park. Due to quick action and organized protest both online and up close and personal, the proposal was pulled off the table.  

Irvine should be congratulated for the victory, but let’s not go so far as to be self-congratulatory. Irvine’s reputation took a pretty big hit in the process. Many now view us as lacking compassion, as elitists and NIMBYs.  

Of course public safety, the protection of our children, families, schools, parks and playgrounds, takes precedence over public opinion. There’s no shame in being a NIMBY when your “back yard” is one of the finest cities in the nation, a place so many have worked so hard to make what it is today. 

But when moms, dads and teachers in Santa Ana, Orange and Anaheim said they wanted us to all know that they love their children, too, it struck a nerve. Those families have been dealing with issues of homelessness for decades. Let’s show them they are not alone. 

As regular readers know, we at ICN are avowed Irvine exceptionalists. We know how much Irvine already does for the disadvantaged in the city and the region. Still, we believe Irvine can and should do more. We can be a leader among the other 34 cities in the county, to take on the issue of homelessness, and provide solutions, not just protestations. 

Irvine can also say “yes.” 

If we’re going to volunteer, be asked, or court-ordered to do more than our share to help the homeless, we should do it the Irvine way. With a masterplan, intelligently executed, and by calling on the resources of excellence we have in the city: the business community, non-profits, educational institutions, civic leaders, and citizens. 

So what can and should we do? First, let’s make clear what’s off the table… forever. No tent cities in Irvine. No transients spending their days at the Orange County Great Park, near our schools, playgrounds or retail centers. No drug dealers with face tattoos riding stolen bikes to deliver contraband to the addicted. No predators.  

Not in Irvine. 

Fear mongering? Not so fast. We visited the Santa Ana River camps often, and that’s what we observed first-hand. But we also saw veterans who served their country, we saw families, and we saw folks who simply down on their luck.  

 So one of the things we’d like is some education on the nature of compassion—do unto others, and all that. We’ll work on that here; we hope you will in your areas of influence, also. 

But enough preaching—let’s get problem solving. Here are a few blue-sky ideas, some practical and some probably non-starters, on how we in Irvine can help solve the immediate emergency crisis, and how to address the issues that contributed to it long-term. 

First, any solution that involves the land adjacent to the Great Park should be predicated on the Board of Supervisors abandoning their ill-conceived plan to build a large and dense retail and condominium complex on the county-owned 108 acres that includes nearly 2,000 housing units and 1 million square feet of office space.  

That plan is currently subject to litigation; the Board of Supervisors should withdraw it, and the city should buy or otherwise obtain control over that land, perhaps by the county agreeing that city planning applies to projects on it.  

While the city should identify a location for both emergency temporary shelter and more permanent facilities in the city, if available, it should not be adjacent to the Great Park.  

We’re certain city staff, experts and others are already exploring suitable locations, perhaps in a vacant industrial tilt-up building in the less dense industrial sectors of the city, such as near the Tustin Air Base/Santa Ana border-adjacent areas of the IBC, or in the Irvine Industrial Complex East. These areas are relatively distant from parks, playgrounds and schools.  

With the right facilities, an indoor shelter seems much more humane than a tent city. What should be done with that land? We’d support using it as a housing solutions incubator. California is in a housing crisis, and not just for the homeless. Let’s streamline regulation and red tape on the county land, and let the city’s best and brightest architects, developers and housing advocates innovate. 

 Meanwhile, Irvine should redouble its support of nonprofits that serve the needy, both in the city and elsewhere. Our city is wealthy in talent and resources. Let’s start spreading that wealth around a bit more.  

Do the homes and shelters Mercy House runs in Santa Ana and Anaheim need support? Let’s offer it, be it financial or in kind. Does Teen Project have its eye on another potential College House in Lake Forest? 
​
The house is for five or six young women, 18-24 years old, who have “aged out” of the foster care system and are homeless or disadvantaged. They stay for about two years each, paying $200 a month in rent that goes in to a savings account returned to them when they leave. 

They have a live-in house mom for support and supervision, receive room and board, college support, paid job internships, an automobile obtainment program, and independent living education.  

We’d be YIMBYs (yes in my back yard) for services like these where we live. Would you? 
 
Having fought back the tent city proposal, let’s check some of our natural NIMBYism as more amenable, but possibly still uncomfortable, solutions arise.  

Here’s one: let’s help veterans. According to online CalVet statistics, Orange County is home to 112,449 veterans, including some 398 who are homeless. CalVet says 129 of those have shelter, while 269 do not.  
Let’s fix that first. 

One way is to use 20 acres or so of the Great Park land to build a Veterans Home. There are only eight in the state, and most are in Northern California. We’ve seen the large one in Yountville and a smaller, newer one in Redding, which should be the model in Irvine.  

It’s home to 154 residents, and sits on 11 acres of donated land. It took 18 years from the initial legislation to completion of the Redding home—let’s see how much better Irvine can do, especially with the CalVet approved Veterans Cemetery going in at the Strawberry Fields a mile or two away. 

Veterans age 55 and above and discharged from active military service under honorable conditions, are eligible to apply for admission. Residents engage in a wide range of activities, and “live in an atmosphere of dignity and respect—a true home for each resident veteran.” 

They enjoy comprehensive medical, dental, pharmacy, rehabilitation services and social activities within a homelike, small community environment.  

CalVet says the Veterans Homes “acknowledge the tremendous sacrifice California veterans have made, and recognizes them for their noble service to our nation.” 

Let’s do the same, right here in Irvine.  ​

ICN Editorial Board ​

“Booze beats exercise for living past 90, study says.”  

That’s how one of many hyperbolic headlines summarized a decades-long UCI research project.  

Called the 90+ Study, it has tracked the self-reported habits of Laguna Woods residents since 1981. The ongoing study has revealed that nonagenarians who toasted their health with two drinks daily were 18 percent less likely to experience a premature death than those who abstained. Those who took exercises every day (between 15 and 45 minutes) had an 11 percent lower risk and drinking two cups of coffee gave a 10 percent lower risk. 

“If in 1981 you were using alcohol, compared to people your same age who weren’t using alcohol, you lived longer,” Dr. Claudia Kawas, a UCI professor of neurology and neurobiology, said at an American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) conference in February. “I have no explanation for it,” Dr. Kawas said, “but I do firmly believe that modest drinking is associated with longevity.” 

Even if many digital scribes mischaracterized the results, perhaps failing to appreciate distinctions between causation and correlation, the research itself is fascinating. Who doesn’t want to live to 90 while enjoying a glass of good wine and 15 minutes of exercise a day?  

But what’s also is intriguing is how UCI’s scientists continue to do work that impacts our world in ways large and small, whether that research results in a flurry of media coverage or not. And as UCI’s faculty, students and staff strive to impact and improve the world, they make the city of Irvine a better place to live, learn and work in the process. 

Need another example? How’s this: do you like going outside for more than five minutes without burning your skin? If it wasn’t for the groundbreaking—and ozone layer saving—research of Nobel Prize-winning UCI scientist F. Sherwood Rowland, that’s what we might soon be experiencing.  

Hired to run UCI’s chemistry department, Rowland and a colleague discovered in 1973 that a chemical used in hair spray, aerosol deodorants and kitchen refrigerators was slowly destroying Earth’s ozone layer. Ozone is Earth’s natural sunscreen, absorbing most of the incoming UV radiation from the sun and protecting life from DNA-damaging and cancer-causing radiation. Thanks in large part to tireless advocacy by Rowland, the chemicals were banned in 1987. 

When Rowland was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry 21 years later, the award committee said that he may have “saved the world from catastrophe.” The American Chemical Society, the nation’s largest professional society for chemists, said Rowland’s discovery was one of the 10 most-significant advances in chemistry of the 20th century. 

Today, UCI is one of the leading research universities in the world. There’s no telling when the next world-changing technology or world-saving discovery will emerge from the Irvine campus, or what it will be. But we believe those breakthroughs will come. 

The stated goal of UCI’s Gavin Herbert Eye Institute is simple: ending human blindness. The $39-million center opened 2013 as the first building on the UCI campus to be funded entirely with local corporate, foundation and individual gifts. It’s a symbol of Orange County being known as the Silicon Valley of vision, drawing scientists, foundations and technology companies here, all fighting to beat blindness.  

If UCI helps cure blindness, it may be because of stem cell research. The school is an international leader in stem cell treatments for cancer, heart disease, muscular dystrophy, ALS, MS, Alzheimer’s, stroke, and spinal cord injury. 

UCI is home to the Advanced Power and Energy Program working on the development and deployment of efficient, environmentally sensitive, sustainable power generation and energy conversion worldwide.  
Environmental research at UCI addresses challenges of climate change that affect the globe, including issues of water scarcity that affect us in California. 

The importance of having UCI in the city of Irvine cannot be overstated, nor can the relationship the university has to the economic growth and vitality of the region. Some 100 startups utilizing 1,000 inventions and 600 U.S. patents have been born and/or incubated at UCI, with many of the companies establishing their first offices in Irvine. Other companies not born out of UCI, such as Broadcom, have strong relationships with the university. 

“Whether we pass on to the future the structure of a protein, stunning new works of art, the next version of the Internet, or a deeper understanding of the world’s religions, universities are where the best that has been thought, written, or discovered flourishes,” wrote Robert M. Berdahl, former president of the Association of American Universities. When UCI was invited to join the prestigious group in 1996, it was the youngest university ever to become a member. 
​
For many Irvine residents, education is the prime factor that drew us to the city. Jobs, safety, good neighborhoods and a vibrant economy are other reasons, to be sure. But education, whether to study for an advanced UCI degree or to put kids in an IUSD kindergarten class, remains a beacon that guides families and individuals to Irvine from around the world.  ​

By Bill Cook

This June, the good citizens of Irvine will decide whether to fulfill a promise to honor the service and sacrifice of U.S. veterans with a cemetery on the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro.  

A “yes” vote on the cemetery referendum means there will be a cemetery. A “no” means the promise will be broken. If the nay-sayers prevail, there likely will never be a final resting place for veterans in Orange County, and certainly not in Irvine. 

Let me be blunt: The June 5 vote is NOT an “either/or” vote on the location of a veterans cemetery, but rather a “yes/no” vote on whether there will ever be such a cemetery at the former MCAS El Toro.  

There is only one cemetery site. It’s on former MCAS El Toro land near the 405 and 5 convergence that’s known as the Strawberry Fields. It’s been approved by the city of Irvine, the state of California, including the governor, legislature and CalVet.  

Only two elected representatives, councilmembers Jeff Lalloway and Lynn Schott, are against it. They also voted against holding a special election on June 5. I believe that’s because they know that a majority of voters will support veterans and those who want a cemetery in the city.  
​
So for those who want a veterans cemetery in the city, VOTE YES. For those who don’t, vote no. After all, that’s your right as an American—one of the many rights veterans served, fought and died to protect.  ​

By Irvine City News staff

We have voiced our strong support for a veterans cemetery at the approved Strawberry Fields location on the former MCAS El Toro base for many months, in many different ways. The choice seems so clear to us, the politically motivated opposition so wrong-headed, that this issue we’ll give other voices a chance to speak. Here are excerpts from editorials, letters and opinion pieces published online, in the OC Register, and elsewhere.  
 
“It may surprise you, but there is no veterans cemetery here in Orange County. That’s not for lack of trying. Orange County veterans have fought and lobbied for years to create a local cemetery for those who have bravely served our country….But now a new and totally unnecessary obstacle has been placed in the way of our veterans cemetery. A group of individuals with a different agenda have decided to support an initiative that would stop the construction of our cemetery.  

“The most offensive and candidly disgusting part of their opposition is that they are saying they are supportive of a veterans cemetery. Just not this one. 

Those of us who fought for our freedoms are tired of waiting and tired of being prevented from being laid to rest with our brothers and sisters at home. We’re tired of being prevented from leaving this earth under the American flag—in our county. 

No one who has served would stand in the way of an Orange County veterans cemetery that is ready to be built, approved to be built and funded to be built. Stop the selfishness, stop the self-interest, stop the opposition and stop the initiative. Build the Orange County veterans cemetery now.” 

—Nick Berardino, committee member of the OC Veterans Memorial Park Foundation 

 
“Which is a more fitting site to honor those who sacrificed their time and lives to maintain your privilege to live in a free country: an unfunded, polluted, more expensive, hidden, and unapproved property, or one that is funded, not-polluted, less expensive, visible, and approved? 

You are doing such a disservice to the nation, the state, and the local community. Please stop wasting taxpayer time and money by stopping your petition efforts.”  

—Mike Padian, former Irvine Co. executive, in a letter to Larry Agran cc’d to media 

 
“This [Strawberry Field] site has the support of neighbors, veterans, the developer and a majority of the City Council. That is why the politics must end now. And it shouldn’t have been made a political issue or an election year issue in first place. It is about local veterans deserving an appropriate final resting place—and this is the place.”  
​

--OC Register Editorial Board  
 
“The current senseless battle over where veterans will be able to find their ultimate resting place is demonstrating that the very worst of political opportunism is alive and well in OC. But even more importantly, it is conversely providing a rare glimpse of the power of bipartisan action to do good….Both political parties overwhelmingly endorsed the same location for Orange County’s first veterans cemetery.... The governor supports the Strawberry Field location. So does the majority of Irvine’s City Council. A local developer, FivePoint, has pledged $10 million toward phase one of construction. The Orange County Register supports it. Most importantly, veterans carry the hope that this might actually be a place where they can rest. 

A small group of politically-motivated individuals are attempting to derail construction on the Strawberry Fields location by launching a misleading campaign to gather signatures claiming to ‘Save The Veterans Cemetery.’ Of course, the cemetery has been approved, dedicated and doesn’t need ‘saving’… 

On the battlefield, the men and women of our great military don’t fight under the banner of Republican or Democrat. They sacrifice their lives in defense of our American flag, under the banner of red, white and blue. 

​When they come home, they deserve to rest in a place that represents that same unity of purpose they brought with them in fighting for our nation. They deserve a place that’s close enough for their wives and children and grandchildren to visit, to reflect, to remember and to find peace. The current veterans cemetery location, widely supported across party lines, fulfills each of those obligations we owe to our county’s veterans.  

—Jennifer Muir Beuthin, general manager of the OC Employees Association  ​

​By Irvine City News Editorial Staff 

It was a beautiful, clear day as hundreds of U.S. military veterans gathered at the strawberry fields near the 405 Freeway to celebrate a flag raising and dedication of the approved site for a new veterans cemetery. 

The veterans of several wars gathered. Some arrived by car and motorcoach, others roared in on Harley Davidson motorcycles. Some moved freely, others used wheelchairs and walkers.

But those who could, stood and all saluted as the American flag was raised to fly next to those representing the branches of the military they had served in.

Nearly every elected official that serves the city of Irvine was in attendance, from mayor and city council members to members of Congress. All gathered to honor the veterans and their quest to be buried on the hallowed ground of the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro.

As those gathered listened to the speeches and saw the tears in the eyes and excitement on the faces of the veterans, they could be excused for thinking, at least for an hour or so, that the issue of establishing a veterans cemetery in Irvine had been put to rest, finally, allowing the honored veterans an assurance that within a few years they themselves would have a place to rest.

They shall. But not until they and their allies in the city, state and the nation have fought a few more skirmishes alongside them, and on their behalf.

Two of the politicians missing from the ceremony honoring veterans were Irvine Mayor Pro Tem Lynn Schott and Councilmember Jeffrey Lalloway. The duo voted against the land transfer which was approved and passed by the Irvine City Council, and which made the awe-inspiring afternoon in the strawberry fields possible. 

Also absent was former Irvine Mayor Larry Agran. As noted elsewhere in this issue, Agran is on the march. He’s filed a lawsuit against the veterans cemetery being located at the approved site. And he has turned in petitions in support of a referendum regarding the site of the cemetery. 

Those out gathering signatures in support of the Agran referendum told shoppers and citizens that the effort was to “save” a Great Park cemetery. That was the height of cynicism and political foul play.

There’s no doubt that the strawberry fields site is simply better for a veterans cemetery than the original ARDA site. As this publication has been writing for some time, all one has to do is visit the two sites and do a bit of reading to realize that.

Or read the CalVet report that came out in June 2016 estimating that the first phase of creating a cemetery at the ARDA sit would cost $77.4 million because that land is contaminated and includes 77 structures that would need to be demolished.
​
Should either the lawsuit or referendum advance, many say the cemetery will be stalled, perhaps indefinitely. And that would be the biggest loss of all for our veterans.